Yesterday I shared with you the news Dolphins offensive coordinator Mike Sherman doesn't see Michael Egnew getting involved in the offense much this year and the reasons the coach gave for that.

Me?

It's bad news when a third-round draft pick playing a position that needs upgrade has been basically eliminated from playing this year. It's not a problem if a veteran ahead of him is playing great. It's fine if the rookie is simply caught in a numbers game.

But not playing based on his slow start while the guys playing are having a slow month?

Where does that make room for improvement? How does that keep the players playing from feeling entitled or too comfortable? Most importantly, where does that give Miami the opportunity to find out what talent is on the roster?

And that leads me down a road that eventually the Dolphins will travel. That leads me to thinking about the future. This year, you see, is on the brink of being over.

...

So think of what I'm advocating as desperate times calling for desperate measures. Sort of.

I, for one, am thinking this rebuilding season needs to get back to, well, rebuilding. The Dolphins have youngsters on the bench that may not be quite ready to play but could be the future for the team nonetheless.

Well, it's time to see what the future promises. Rishard Matthews finally got in a game last week and didn't seem overmatched.

...

Let's face it, Tannehill is in a slump because he cannot get the offense in the end zone lately. Maybe Matt Moore would do better. But the thought of a switch hasn't crossed anyone's mind (mine included) because Tannehill is the future and needs all the experience he can get now.

Its possible you lose some of the veterans if you throw in the towel and start the rookie/young player tryout. But wasn't this the case from the start of training camp?

When you're hoping Garrard, Johnson and Naanee will suddenly emerge or re-emerge you're really playing against the odds. A lot of the vets we're really concerned with are in contract years anyway. I'm not going to fret if Dansby, Burnett or Bess mail it in.

Give the young guys a shot, let them try to build some confidence.

Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:50 am

Makchell

Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pmPosts: 7927

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

When you're hoping Garrard, Johnson and Naanee will suddenly emerge or re-emerge you're really playing against the odds.

They are all on the street right now, that's bad.

Tue Nov 20, 2012 11:06 am

jammer

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pmPosts: 7005Location: Topsfield, MA

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Makchell wrote:

When you're hoping Garrard, Johnson and Naanee will suddenly emerge or re-emerge you're really playing against the odds.

They are all on the street right now, that's bad.

And that is why I think Ireland gets another year. His proposition to Ross was probably "lets start building a Joe Philbin team and slowly start gutting a Parcells/Sparano. If we're lucky we catch lightning in a bottle and these vets give Miami a winning transition season." Didn't work out.

Obviously other young guys like Vernon, Miller, Thigpen, Lane etc will be back but I'm just pointing out the guys we banked on playing signficant snaps.

I still want to see what these guys show down the stretch, especially against better teams, before really focusing on next year. However, its not out of the question to say this team will look drastically different. May as well give the younger guys a shot for some evaluation.

Tue Nov 20, 2012 11:29 am

wkloiber13

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pmPosts: 5117

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Hello! You play to win the game!

If the younger players give you the best chance to win, then you play them. Otherwise, you do everything you can to win. Period.

Tannehill is your best quarterback. Egnew has been terrible and likely isn't ready to play. Matthews is the only guy on that list that possibly could make an impact. He had a nice catch and drew a big PI flag that helped us move down the field late. He's a guy I wouldn't mind seeing get some playing time overy guys like Gaffney or Moore.

Last edited by wkloiber13 on Tue Nov 20, 2012 11:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Tue Nov 20, 2012 11:35 am

IamPZ

Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 amPosts: 4098

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

yeah these articles make it seem like these guys think wayyy too technical and not enough factual.

If the guys are playing well in front of your eyes then play them... dont sit them because you don't have enough snaps in the game.

Ugh 3 straight losses is starting to get to me.

Tue Nov 20, 2012 11:39 am

Dphins4me

2014 Survival Champ

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:23 pmPosts: 5652

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

After watching SF last night. I wonder what Miami continues to do wrong. SF was a horrible team in '10. Hire Harbaugh & they are Super Bowl contenders the next year & a major threat this year. No real major overhaul in their team. Pretty much the same players who were horrible in '10 were solid in '11.

However, here sits Miami on Yr what of rebuilding? New players, new coaches, new this, new that & Miami still has the same issues. OL who cannot block. Wr who cannot get open or catch. Qbs who make the wrong decision.

Its frustrating.

Tue Nov 20, 2012 12:43 pm

Haha

Phinfever All Pro

Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:08 pmPosts: 375Location: Cincinnati

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

WR, Matthews. Please.

_________________

Tue Nov 20, 2012 2:35 pm

10acjed

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:43 pmPosts: 4885Location: Wellington, FL

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Why not just lose out and prep for march....

Oh wait, playing the younger guys who cant figure it out in practice will help that... Yeah, play them... LOL...

_________________Caveat: These are the opinions of this user, and may differ from your opinion. Please use common sense before taking offense. Reply may contain sarcasm

Tue Nov 20, 2012 3:44 pm

wkloiber13

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pmPosts: 5117

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Dphins4me wrote:

After watching SF last night. I wonder what Miami continues to do wrong. SF was a horrible team in '10. Hire Harbaugh & they are Super Bowl contenders the next year & a major threat this year. No real major overhaul in their team. Pretty much the same players who were horrible in '10 were solid in '11.

However, here sits Miami on Yr what of rebuilding? New players, new coaches, new this, new that & Miami still has the same issues. OL who cannot block. Wr who cannot get open or catch. Qbs who make the wrong decision.

Its frustrating.

Our staff is good with quarterbacks, but Harbaugh is a freaking genius with quarterbacks. He took Alex Smith, one of the biggest draft busts of all time, and turned him into the best game manager in the NFL. He took that Kapernick kid, a 2nd round pick that needed time to develop, and look what he did last night. Bottom line, we tried to get Harbaugh, but we couldn't. No amount of $$$ was going to lure him away from the Bay Area. But I'm confident in time Philbin and Sherman can work their magic with Tannehill just like they did with Rodgers.

Tue Nov 20, 2012 4:29 pm

Rock Sexton

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pmPosts: 6186

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

How is our staff "good" with QB's in the development sense of the word?

More like Philbin has been "around" a good QB in Rodgers. Tom Clements has always been Rodgers' QB coach and with him like white on rice on the sidelines during game days. Philbin even told people to stop giving him the credit for Rodgers.

Quote:

But Philbin, formerly the Packers’ offensive coordinator the past five years, had a sobering reminder for Dolphins fans on Thursday after drafting Tannehill – he wasn’t really the one who developed Rodgers in Green Bay.

When asked what his involvement was in turning Rodgers from the 25th overall pick to Super Bowl MVP, Philbin answered, “I wouldn’t say a lot.” Philbin of course sat in on meetings with Rodgers and helped design the first 15 plays of each game, but didn’t have as much direct involvement with Rodgers as did other members of the Packers’ coaching staff.

“Tom Clements was quarterbacks coach, and Tom did a fantastic job,” Philbin said. “I was in their meetings two or three times a week, but I kept my big mouth shut because I believed in Tom Clements. So I don’t want to sit here and take a lot of credit for Aaron Rodgers at all.”

Other than that, Sherman didn't coach up Favre, he was already among the league's best before he became his coach. Sherman also never did anything in college, not to mention started Jerrod Johnson over Ryan Tannehill.

I believe that after having been around Rodgers that Philbin recognizes what a good QB looks like. Alas, the job primarily falls on the shoulders of Sherman and Taylor ..... two guys who I'm still quite unsure of.

_________________

Tue Nov 20, 2012 4:40 pm

wkloiber13

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pmPosts: 5117

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Rock Sexton wrote:

How is our staff "good" with QB's in the development sense of the word?

More like Philbin has been around a good QB in Rodgers. Tom Clements has always been Rodgers' QB coach and with him like white on rice on the sidelines during game days. Philbin even told people to stop giving him the credit for Rodgers. Matt Flynn? Well he's a backup in Seattle.

Other than that, Sherman didn't coach up Favre, he was already among the league's best before he became his coach. Sherman also never did anything in college, not to mention started Jerrod Johnson over Ryan Tannehill.

I believe that after having been around Rodgers that Philbin recognizes what a good QB looks like. Alas, the job primarily falls on the shoulders of Sherman and Taylor ..... two guys who I'm still quite unsure of.

Offensive coordinators sit in meetings with these guys, they help run portions of practices, and they go over gameplans with them. They play an important role in the developmental process. While the quarterbacks coach's is larger, you still can't say that Philbin had nothing to do with Rodgers success. Plus Philbin is a pretty humble guy, you wouldn't expect him to toot his own horn.

With regards to Sherman, I'm not too sure, I think he's simply a good offensive coordinator. About the only thing I can see on his quarterback resume is he was able to take the Houston Texans offense from 28th to 14th with David Carr as the quarterback, Carr completed 68% of his passes that year, which to me is impressive considering how bad Carr was.

Same goes for Taylor, he's a very young guy who I remember from his playing days at Nebraska, but his record begins and ends with Ryan Tannehill in terms of the NFL.

I guess we've got a bit of mixed bag, but both Philbin and Sherman have been around the block a time or two and both have been a part of championship teams with elite quarterbacks.

I'm hoping they can make Tannehill elite and turn our franchise into a championship caliber club. But I know it isn't going to be easy, and the odds are against them. You can't erase 10+ years of failure with the flip of a switch.

Tue Nov 20, 2012 5:02 pm

Rock Sexton

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pmPosts: 6186

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

wkloiber13 wrote:

Offensive coordinators sit in meetings with these guys, they help run portions of practices, and they go over gameplans with them. They play an important role in the developmental process. While the quarterbacks coach's is larger, you still can't say that Philbin had nothing to do with Rodgers success. Plus Philbin is a pretty humble guy, you wouldn't expect him to toot his own horn.

Again, look at Philbins own words that I quoted. He admits point blank that Clements had the "predominant" role in developing Rodgers. It has nothing to do with being humble.

Quote:

With regards to Sherman, I'm not too sure, I think he's simply a good offensive coordinator. About the only thing I can see on his quarterback resume is he was able to take the Houston Texans offense from 28th to 14th with David Carr as the quarterback, Carr completed 68% of his passes that year, which to me is impressive considering how bad Carr was.

Same goes for Taylor, he's a very young guy who I remember from his playing days at Nebraska, but his record begins and ends with Ryan Tannehill in terms of the NFL.

I guess we've got a bit of mixed bag, but both Philbin and Sherman have been around the block a time or two and both have been a part of championship teams with elite quarterbacks.

I'm hoping they can make Tannehill elite and turn our franchise into a championship caliber club. But I know it isn't going to be easy, and the odds are against them. You can't erase 10+ years of failure with the flip of a switch.

[/quote]

I just wish we had somebody with a better pedigree taking care of the hands-on stuff with our QB.

_________________

Tue Nov 20, 2012 5:12 pm

Makchell

Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pmPosts: 7927

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

How is our staff "good" with QB's in the development sense of the word?

More like Philbin has been "around" a good QB in Rodgers. Tom Clements has always been Rodgers' QB coach and with him like white on rice on the sidelines during game days. Philbin even told people to stop giving him the credit for Rodgers.

Also remember these are the same coaches that had Gerrad penciled in as the starter. Guess what? The Steelers just signed a QB named Hoying, I have no idea who that is. Meanwhile, Gerrad is still out there. Then again when the Pack was losing all the talk was how much they miss Philbin while we were winning and then we lose and the Pack wins and now it's reversed. lol

Tue Nov 20, 2012 5:49 pm

wkloiber13

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pmPosts: 5117

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Rock Sexton wrote:

wkloiber13 wrote:

Offensive coordinators sit in meetings with these guys, they help run portions of practices, and they go over gameplans with them. They play an important role in the developmental process. While the quarterbacks coach's is larger, you still can't say that Philbin had nothing to do with Rodgers success. Plus Philbin is a pretty humble guy, you wouldn't expect him to toot his own horn.

Again, look at Philbins own words that I quoted. He admits point blank that Clements had the "predominant" role in developing Rodgers. It has nothing to do with being humble.

Quote:

With regards to Sherman, I'm not too sure, I think he's simply a good offensive coordinator. About the only thing I can see on his quarterback resume is he was able to take the Houston Texans offense from 28th to 14th with David Carr as the quarterback, Carr completed 68% of his passes that year, which to me is impressive considering how bad Carr was.

Same goes for Taylor, he's a very young guy who I remember from his playing days at Nebraska, but his record begins and ends with Ryan Tannehill in terms of the NFL.

I guess we've got a bit of mixed bag, but both Philbin and Sherman have been around the block a time or two and both have been a part of championship teams with elite quarterbacks.

I'm hoping they can make Tannehill elite and turn our franchise into a championship caliber club. But I know it isn't going to be easy, and the odds are against them. You can't erase 10+ years of failure with the flip of a switch.

I just wish we had somebody with a better pedigree taking care of the hands-on stuff with our QB.[/quote]

I agree that Clements deserves the majority of the praise. It's really tough to say how involved Philbin was or wasn't with Rodgers, but I have a hard time thinking he had little or nothing to do with him. We've seen Joe Philbin's coaching style up close and personal on Hard Knocks. The guy is anal retentive as hell. I have a hard time believing he wasn't involved in some way shape or form with every little detail involving the offense, that includes Rodgers.

Yeah, our quarterbacks coach is no mystery. We know exactly why he got the job. The entire reason Zach Taylor got the job is because he's married to Sherman's daughter. That and he's been an assistant at A&M since 2008. Talk about a hook up.

I found it interesting to see that his brother played quarterback at Marshall and is currently a QB coach at Tulsa.

I'm sure there were better candidates, but for now we'll just have to wait and see how the guy does. If anyone is going to teach Tannehill the way Sherman wants him to play, it's Taylor. Taylor has been working with Tannehill ever since he arrived at Texas A&M. It seems to me like the kid is being groomed to be a future offensive coordinator by Sherman.

Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:09 pm

jammer

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pmPosts: 7005Location: Topsfield, MA

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Makchell wrote:

How is our staff "good" with QB's in the development sense of the word?

More like Philbin has been "around" a good QB in Rodgers. Tom Clements has always been Rodgers' QB coach and with him like white on rice on the sidelines during game days. Philbin even told people to stop giving him the credit for Rodgers.

Also remember these are the same coaches that had Gerrad penciled in as the starter. Guess what? The Steelers just signed a QB named Hoying, I have no idea who that is. Meanwhile, Gerrad is still out there. Then again when the Pack was losing all the talk was how much they miss Philbin while we were winning and then we lose and the Pack wins and now it's reversed. lol

Brian Hoyer, Tom Brady's backup who was beaten out by Ryan Mallet this summer. There was some talk of him being another Matt Flynn type until he looked like garbage in the preseason. He was an undrafted FA out of Michigan State.

It says something about Garrard that a few teams really need upgraded QB play and he's not getting a look, unless he has some high contract demands or is stubborn about getting a starting job.

Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:06 am

Rock Sexton

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pmPosts: 6186

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Makchell wrote:

How is our staff "good" with QB's in the development sense of the word?

More like Philbin has been "around" a good QB in Rodgers. Tom Clements has always been Rodgers' QB coach and with him like white on rice on the sidelines during game days. Philbin even told people to stop giving him the credit for Rodgers.

Also remember these are the same coaches that had Gerrad penciled in as the starter. Guess what? The Steelers just signed a QB named Hoying, I have no idea who that is. Meanwhile, Gerrad is still out there. Then again when the Pack was losing all the talk was how much they miss Philbin while we were winning and then we lose and the Pack wins and now it's reversed. lol

Just goes to show you just how silly the Garrard signing was in the first place when you had Matt Moore already on the roster. Nobody is even sniffing around Garrard. It's clear Moore was in camp strictly for trade bait at the time, but as fate/injury would have it the Dolphins were forced to keep him and put on the happy "we love you Matt" routine. LOL

_________________

Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:02 am

wkloiber13

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pmPosts: 5117

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

jammer wrote:

Makchell wrote:

How is our staff "good" with QB's in the development sense of the word?

More like Philbin has been "around" a good QB in Rodgers. Tom Clements has always been Rodgers' QB coach and with him like white on rice on the sidelines during game days. Philbin even told people to stop giving him the credit for Rodgers.

Also remember these are the same coaches that had Gerrad penciled in as the starter. Guess what? The Steelers just signed a QB named Hoying, I have no idea who that is. Meanwhile, Gerrad is still out there. Then again when the Pack was losing all the talk was how much they miss Philbin while we were winning and then we lose and the Pack wins and now it's reversed. lol

Brian Hoyer, Tom Brady's backup who was beaten out by Ryan Mallet this summer. There was some talk of him being another Matt Flynn type until he looked like garbage in the preseason. He was an undrafted FA out of Michigan State.

It says something about Garrard that a few teams really need upgraded QB play and he's not getting a look, unless he has some high contract demands or is stubborn about getting a starting job.

It's a veteran minimum thing. Teams don't want to pay older players like Garrard close to $1M a season. While the new collective bargaining agreement did a lot to help give the rookies less and the vets more. It also has the potential to force many older veteran backups out of the league sooner.

4-6 years - $700,0007-9 years - $825,00010+ years - $910,000

Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:54 am

jammer

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pmPosts: 7005Location: Topsfield, MA

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Pitt has to worry about the playoffs. I have a hard time thinking 200k is dissuading them from inking Garrard if they felt he gave them their best chance to win while Roethlisberger is out. Brian Hoyer is about as unknown as you get, even if it is just to backup Batch for a few weeks.

Wed Nov 21, 2012 12:07 pm

Finhead34

2015 Phinfever VIP Donor!

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:57 amPosts: 5448Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Yeah really. Amazing really that Garrard went from supposedly having such a great camp and being named a starter until he got hurt, then he mysteriously never even gets picked up as a back up by anyone else? Especially with teams having injuries.

Wed Nov 21, 2012 12:14 pm

Rock Sexton

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pmPosts: 6186

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

jammer wrote:

Pitt has to worry about the playoffs. I have a hard time thinking 200k is dissuading them from inking Garrard if they felt he gave them their best chance to win while Roethlisberger is out.

Ya, seriously.

_________________

Wed Nov 21, 2012 12:19 pm

Makchell

Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pmPosts: 7927

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Pitt has to worry about the playoffs. I have a hard time thinking 200k is dissuading them from inking Garrard if they felt he gave them their best chance to win while Roethlisberger is out. Brian Hoyer is about as unknown as you get, even if it is just to backup Batch for a few weeks.

I thought the vet min thing too, but come on, Pitt does what it takes to win. Face it Gerrad sucks.

Wed Nov 21, 2012 2:33 pm

jammer

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pmPosts: 7005Location: Topsfield, MA

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Makchell wrote:

Pitt has to worry about the playoffs. I have a hard time thinking 200k is dissuading them from inking Garrard if they felt he gave them their best chance to win while Roethlisberger is out. Brian Hoyer is about as unknown as you get, even if it is just to backup Batch for a few weeks.

I thought the vet min thing too, but come on, Pitt does what it takes to win. Face it Gerrad sucks.

Mak, its hysterical. First it was your insistance on Gerrard vs the correct spelling Garrard. Now its simply Gerrad. Is that the fancy spelling of the guy from Subway who lost a ton of weight? Its okay bud, I drank a lot of beer tonight too.

Wed Nov 21, 2012 6:31 pm

wkloiber13

Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pmPosts: 5117

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Makchell wrote:

Pitt has to worry about the playoffs. I have a hard time thinking 200k is dissuading them from inking Garrard if they felt he gave them their best chance to win while Roethlisberger is out. Brian Hoyer is about as unknown as you get, even if it is just to backup Batch for a few weeks.

I thought the vet min thing too, but come on, Pitt does what it takes to win. Face it Gerrad sucks.

Hoyer is younger, cheaper, and probably every bit as good as Garrard. Garrard had a $2.25M contract with us before we cut him. He'll likely want something similar (per game) from a team looking to bring him in late. I was using the vet minimum thing as a potential reason, but more than likely he's just too expensive and his health is too questionable.

Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:30 pm

Kev1321

2015 Phinfever VIP Donor!

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pmPosts: 3631Location: MA.

Re: Why not consider playing a couple of younger players?

Quote:

In Week 17, against the Miami Dolphins, he threw a 42-yard touchdown pass to Brandon Tate, the first touchdown of Hoyer's NFL career.